January 15, 2004
Ms. Jane Lynch
Director of Federal Programs
Calhoun County Schools
HC 89 Box 119
Mt. Zion, W.Va 26151
Letter of Clarification FY04-05
Advocate’s Role in IEP Meeting
Dear Ms. Lynch:
This letter is in response to your request for a clarification regarding the role of a self-appointed advocate
working with the parents in your district. According to your letter, this individual is attending
Individualized Education Program (IEP) team meetings and is speaking in place of the parent at these
meetings. Your specific questions and the responses of the Office of Special Education are as follows:
Question:
meetings?
If he has no “special expertise regarding the child”, what is his proper role at IEP team
Response: Both the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 34 C.F.R. 300.344 (a)
(6) and Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Exceptional Students, Section 5.1.2. state that parents
and school districts have the right to invite individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding
the child to serve as additional members of IEP meetings. The determination of whether the individual
possesses the required knowledge or special expertise regarding the student as described in paragraph (a)(6)
of Section 34 C.F R. 300.344. (c) is made on a case-by-case basis by the party (parents or district) who
invited the individual to be a member of the IEP team. Therefore, knowledge is defined by the party who is
inviting the specific individual(s).
Question: Please define “knowledge of the child”, as cited by the advocate in section 300.344 (a) (6).
Response: With regard to “knowledge of the child,” refer to previous response as cited above.
Question: In the context of the definition of knowledge, what is his proper role at the IEP team meetings?
Response: Since the parent has invited the advocate to the IEP team meeting, this person is considered to
be an IEP team member and may assume an active role in the review and development, if appropriate, of
the student’s IEP. The lay advocate is responsible for ensuring that his/her recommendations and decisions
are made with respect to the individual educational needs of the student and/or views of the parent. The
nature and extent of the advocate’s role should be predetermined by the parent, clarified with the advocate
prior to the IEP team meeting and then communicated to the IEP team members. The focus of the meeting
for all team members, regardless of their role, should be student or parent-centered with regard to
determining the student’s unique needs and how those needs can be met through the development of an
appropriate IEP.
Lynch
Page Two
January 15, 2004
Question: Is he [advocate] permitted to speak in place of a parent, much as the role of an attorney?
Response: Yes. If the district has determined at the IEP team meeting that the parent has provided the
advocate the authority, he may do so. However, the advocate cannot attend the IEP team meeting in lieu of
the parent and only the parent and the student, when appropriate, are entitled to the procedural safeguard
protections delineated in Policy 2419, Section 8.1.
Again, the nature and extent of the advocate’s role should be predetermined by the parent, clarified
with the advocate prior to the IEP team meeting and then communicated to the IEP team members.
Therefore, it is the parent’s responsibility to define the advocate’s role and the IEP team chairperson’s
responsibility to obtain clarification from the parent as to the advocate’s role, including whether the
advocate may speak for the parent.
Please note that only the parent and student, when appropriate, is entitled to the procedural
safeguards as described in Policy 2419, Section 8.1, including prior written notice, procedural safeguards
parent participation (e.g., notification of IEP team meetings) and parent consent.
Question: Is it appropriate for the IEP team to directly interact with the advocate at the IEP team
meeting?
Response: Yes. If the parent has determined that the advocate has knowledge or special expertise
regarding the student and has invited this individual to serve as a member of the student’s IEP team, then
the advocate is a participating member of the IEP team. Please note that voting to make IEP decisions is
not appropriate and the IEP team should work toward consensus among all team members, regardless of
their roles. If a disagreement occurs during the review and/or development of the student’s IEP with any
IEP team member and the dispute cannot be resolved, the county school district has the ultimate
responsibility to ensure that the IEP includes the services the student needs in order to receive a free
appropriate public education.
If you have further questions regarding this issue or need additional information, please contact
Ghaski Browning or Kay Johnston, Coordinators, Office of Special Education, or me at (304) 558-2696
(V/TDD).
Sincerely
Dee Braley, Ed.D.
Executive Director
Office of Special Education
DB/rb
TACalhoun